50 cal?

velocity will have to go up there is no dobt about it if it is desired to have compareable properties to .68.
I think it could be a good thing in the long run, but I have two problems for the immediate future.

1. older gear will become obsolete because there will be no conversion kit.
2. I will have to buy new barrels (there is no way around this)

this is why i believe it is important for fields and stores to continue to sell .68 supplies even if .50 becomes the new standard. If both options are available then I see no problem with .50. We should not be forced to shoot .50 this will cause a riff in our already diminishing community.

I know about the current conversion kits but kits will not be made for everything and they are not going to just give me a barrel kit. maybe, just maybe the conversion kit may come with a barrel but not likely, and stiffi or any other barrel company isnt going to send me out a new barrel because i want to shoot some smaller balls.

since 68 has worked for like 30 years or something i'm pretty sure we can keep using it. changing to 50 probably wont make paintball a huge mainstream sport and make the recballers just love paintball and come more often.

since 68 has worked for like 30 years or something i'm pretty sure we can keep using it. changing to 50 probably wont make paintball a huge mainstream sport and make the recballers just love paintball and come more often.

If a compact car is traveling at 60 mph and a semi is traveling at 60 mph which one is easier to stop? that is the effects of momentum, and energy. what i am saying is that .5 velocity in the forward direction drop off quicker and so to compensate for that you will have to increase the initial velocity to be comparable to .68.

Shot drop off is just one characteristic that differs.

I know that you shot them at 300 fps but did you shoot them at a distance of 100 ft? you wont be able the difference in drop off if the shot distance is short.

So if fps is not increased then you will end up playing in each others faces so that you can hit your opponent, or fields will need to be shortened.

The site that shall not be named got to shoot it at cup on one of the fields and said shooting from corner to corner it shot the same.....they had a hand held chrono and verified fps. Someone said it was due to less resistance on the smaller ball that it is able to travel at the same speed etc.

Also let me ask this for the brainiacs out there: if you shoot 2 objects at the same velocity, won't the larger & heavier object slow down and drop off faster than the smaller and lighter object?

And to those concerned about conversion kits, I am astonished at PE, SP Impulse and now check it all 3 having stuff ready to convert......that is more support than I thought possible at this stage.

I can see Spyder and the rental marker companies kicking out kits pretty easily for the majority of markers if need be. Will be interesting over the next 6 months to see who else hops onboard.

I am open to it, but a lot of my openess is due to the fact that all I would have to have is a kit for my rotor and my Geo and I am set. So it would be super easy for me.......if it truely is cheaper and works the same, I will hop right onboard!

The site that shall not be named got to shoot it at cup on one of the fields and said shooting from corner to corner it shot the same.....they had a hand held chrono and verified fps. Someone said it was due to less resistance on the smaller ball that it is able to travel at the same speed etc.

The problem with this is that the smaller, lighter ball actually needs to be traveling faster at the same distance to break on the target. Since it has a greatly diminish mass, it will require a greater velocity upon impact to break the shell.

Also let me ask this for the brainiacs out there: if you shoot 2 objects at the same velocity, won't the larger & heavier object slow down and drop off faster than the smaller and lighter object?

No. Actually, it has much less to do with the diameter as the weight. They will both be affected by gravity in the same way. i.e. they will both hit the ground at the same time if shot at the same angle and height. I assume you are talking about the .68 caliber ball having possibly having a greater wind resistance factor, which is true because it has a larger surface area. Even though the surface area is greater, the greater weight of the .68 overcomes this resistance much better than the .50 caliber ball. So, the .50 caliber ball will hit the ground at the same time as the .68 caliber ball, but the .68 caliber ball will travel a substantially greater distance while at the same time retaining much more of its inertial energy. Make sense? This is all assuming both balls use the same paint fills.

Personally, the only way I can see the .50 caliber working unless they either find a much heavier fill or maximum velocities are raised to accommodate. Both options will result in a more painful paintball experience. The only other option ( I don't think it's viable) is to find a way to produce and shoot a much thinner walled ball. Since fields demand a ball that has a water soluble fill, you are severely limited as to the fill weight. Some of the older oil based paints were much heavier, flew truer, and flew farther than today's paint. PMI came out with a ball around 8 years ago that had titanium flakes in the fill to make it heavier. It shot great, but was expensive and so didn't survive. I really miss the original yellow all star. I believe it had iodine in it for weight, but good Lord above did it shoot straight and far! It also broke very well because of its increased weight to size ratio.

There ya go.

__________________
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -George Orwell

throw a baseball and a ping pong at the same speed and see which one goes further F=MA so if the acceleration is the same aka velocity, and the mass is less then the force on the ball is less meaning it will not shoot the same way